Sending AAS samples to independent, accredited laboratory in Europe

[manafest]

Yeah but it doesn't do much good now since Alpha Pharma is out of business.

Show me the proof alpha pharma is out of business...I did know they had large amounts of stuff seized going thru Denmark in 2013

 

[Burrr]

I heard they are having some issues and may not be exporting, I think Nandro said they have plans to market under a different name to fly under the radar.

 

[bmanstrong]

Yeah but it doesn't do much good now since Alpha Pharma is out of business.

Can you post a link? Where did you hear this?

 

[Boilermech]

Show me the proof alpha pharma is out of business...I did know they had large amounts of stuff seized going thru Denmark in 2013

Seriously? You want me to prove it? Cocky shit aren't you, jk. I read it here on Meso somewhere and then a reseller mentioned it also.

Can you post a link? Where did you hear this?

I'll try and find it but I heard it here on Meso. Also it was confirmed by a reseller. Whether it's true or not makes little difference to me but I'll see what I can find out.

 

[greenddog1]

Lab Testing for AAS Harm Reduction
$3,160 of $50k
Raised by 39 people in 12 days

 

[Boilermech]

Show me the proof alpha pharma is out of business...I did know they had large amounts of stuff seized going thru Denmark in 2013

Can you post a link? Where did you hear this?

Here is where I read it then I ask a reseller and he confirmed it. So take it for what you will.
https://thinksteroids.com/community...tech-Pharmaclinico-or-Alpha-Pharma.134365492/

 

[rpbb]

Lab Testing for AAS Harm Reduction
$3,160 of $50k
Raised by 39 people in 12 days

Made an initial donation, going to set up a monthly next

 

[bmanstrong]

Label claim: EuroChem Laboratories EC Boldoject has a label claim of 200 mg/ml boldenone undecylenate.

Actual content: EuroChem Laboratories EC Boldoject was determined to have anactual content of 164.44 mg/ml boldenone undecylenate.

Is that a pass? Wouldn't that be under dosed?

 

[Millard]

Label claim: EuroChem Laboratories EC Boldoject has a label claim of 200 mg/ml boldenone undecylenate.

Actual content: EuroChem Laboratories EC Boldoject was determined to have anactual content of 164.44 mg/ml boldenone undecylenate.

Is that a pass? Wouldn't that be under dosed?

Yes, it is underdosed but whether it is a 'pass' depends on your criteria. If you set at within 10% of label claim, then no. Simec automatically specifies 20% of label claim as its criteria. It would comply with this specification.

 

[brutus79]

Sending retainer to graphic artist this week. Should have banners, badges and other creative available within a couple of weeks. In the meantime, please use any clout you may have at other forums to alert the community to this independent testing program. Community-wide support will guarantee it's long-term success. Thanks!

Do you think buying ad space in other forums for the program would help?

 

[Millard]

Do you think buying ad space in other forums for the program would help?

Yes. We'll run banners everywhere on MESO first to evaluate performance. Then, we'll look at other forums.

 

[flenser]

Do you think buying ad space in other forums for the program would help?

I would wait until some more results have been posted. ATM it looks more like an ad for European steroid dealers than a program to uncover problems with their products. Anyone without very high confidence in Millard is going to call bs right away. I've already had that proven to me on another forum.

 

[T_L]

I would wait until some more results have been posted. ATM it looks more like an ad for European steroid dealers than a program to uncover problems with their products. Anyone without very high confidence in Millard is going to call bs right away. I've already had that proven to me on another forum.

I've linked it a couple of times too, really disappointing it didn't get much attention.

I still intend to make more donations, but the lack of interest is a real shame.

 

[Millard]

I would wait until some more results have been posted. ATM it looks more like an ad for European steroid dealers than a program to uncover problems with their products. Anyone without very high confidence in Millard is going to call bs right away. I've already had that proven to me on another forum.

If people only want results that always confirm expectations and the opinions of respected bros, then they may not really want an objective lab testing program.

Nonetheless, I can understand the skepticism. The results would likely have been better received if at least one UGL failed miserably, one product was severely underdosed for ALL labs and all the other results were mixed or at least not so close to label claims.

I agree some really bad results would be great for marketing the program. Unfortunately, I don't have any control over that. I'll take objective results over convenient results anytime.

 

[Wunderpus]

If people only want results that always confirm expectations and the opinions of respected bros, then they may not really want an objective lab testing program.

Nonetheless, I can understand the skepticism. The results would likely have been better received if at least one UGL failed miserably, one product was severely underdosed for ALL labs and all the other results were mixed or at least not so close to label claims.

I agree some really bad results would be great for marketing the program. Unfortunately, I don't have any control over that. I'll take objective results over convenient results anytime.

People love to hate...

 

[Cml41987]

If people only want results that always confirm expectations and the opinions of respected bros, then they may not really want an objective lab testing program.

Nonetheless, I can understand the skepticism. The results would likely have been better received if at least one UGL failed miserably, one product was severely underdosed for ALL labs and all the other results were mixed or at least not so close to label claims.

I agree some really bad results would be great for marketing the program. Unfortunately, I don't have any control over that. I'll take objective results over convenient results anytime.

I agree.. It's crazy that people all want properly dosed gear, but when a lab fails miserably as you have stated it brings more attention to the project and shows the potential these labs have to be inconsistent. Thus making people realize that consistent testing is a must in order to apply pressure on labs to produce properly dosed products. Sure now the program may still be small in the scope of things, but it has potential to grow and get to a size that will really have the ability to make labs really strive on quality control!!

 

[manafest]

Here is where I read it then I ask a reseller and he confirmed it. So take it for what you will.
https://thinksteroids.com/community...tech-Pharmaclinico-or-Alpha-Pharma.134365492/[/

If people only want results that always confirm expectations and the opinions of respected bros, then they may not really want an objective lab testing program.

Nonetheless, I can understand the skepticism. The results would likely have been better received if at least one UGL failed miserably, one product was severely underdosed for ALL labs and all the other results were mixed or at least not so close to label claims.

I agree some really bad results would be great for marketing the program. Unfortunately, I don't have any control over that. I'll take objective results over convenient results anytime.

People Never really want the truth these days..Once they have it then they have to face it..!! so yes some boards im sure don't like this approach you have, to me its about as good as it gets for Unbiased factful truth....quite alot of people cannot handle that...

 

[flenser]

If people only want results that always confirm expectations and the opinions of respected bros, then they may not really want an objective lab testing program.

Nonetheless, I can understand the skepticism. The results would likely have been better received if at least one UGL failed miserably, one product was severely underdosed for ALL labs and all the other results were mixed or at least not so close to label claims.

I agree some really bad results would be great for marketing the program. Unfortunately, I don't have any control over that. I'll take objective results over convenient results anytime.

I think most do want objective lab testing, but the results are at odds with more than just bro opinions. That's not criticism of your program, just simple fact. Lab tests and blood tests abound, and they can't all be bogus.

 

[rpbb]

monthly donation set up. And I'm going to place an order with one of the labs that tested good . Going forward, I will only order from one of these labs that pass this testing

 

[Millard]

I think most do want objective lab testing, but the results are at odds with more than just bro opinions. That's not criticism of your program, just simple fact. Lab tests and blood tests abound, and they can't all be bogus.

Who's saying they are all bogus? Not AnabolicLab. This why I repeatedly ask people to exercise caution before making conclusions about single lab test results. A single analytical testing result is strong evidence but it is still only one small piece of the available evidence and should be weighted accordingly.

There is a tendency for many people who believe previous bad blood tests and lab tests are credible to feel they must necessarily reject any positive result from AnabolicLab testing as bogus.

Similarly, many who accept the good AnabolicLab results as credible feel they must reject the contradictory evidence as bogus.

This is the wrong way to evaluate the overall evidence.